Intel Xeon 7460: Six Cores to Bulldoze Opteron
by Johan De Gelas on September 23, 2008 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- IT Computing
Limitations of this report
We are happy that we finally feel comfortable with most of our virtualization testing. We still have to do some in-depth profiling to be completely sure what is going on, but we decided to not wait any longer. This is only the beginning, though. We have tested several other virtualization scenarios (including Windows as Guest OS, Hyper-V as hypervisor, Oracle as database, and so on) but we are still checking the validity of those benchmarks. In other words, we are well aware that this report cannot give you a complete picture; it's only an initial rough draft.
Here are the limitations of our current virtualization testing:
- Out of all the databases, MySQL has shown the best performance on the AMD platform relative to the Intel platform. This is probably a result of the excellent Opteron and Athlon 64 optimizations in the gcc compiler.
- We use a 64-bit version of MySQL, and the Intel architectures pay a small penalty when you run a 64-bit database (no macro-op fusion for example). However, as the 64-bit MySQL performs quite a bit better than the 32-bit one, we feel we made the right decision.
- Our best Opteron is a 95W Opteron 8356, while we used a 130W Xeon X7460 and a 130W Xeon X7350. This is simply a result of what we have had available in the labs in the past months. This problem is easy to solve: the performance of the Opteron 8360SE (125W) will be between 1% and 8% higher, so for those looking at the Opteron 8360SE it is pretty easy to get an idea what this CPU could do.
- No HPC benchmarking, as we wanted to focus our efforts and time on our first virtualization results. Priorities…
Please keep these limitations in mind.
Conclusion
The third party benchmark numbers are unanimous: servers based on Intel's monster hex-core processor are the best choice when for high-end database/ERP applications. Compared to the previous Xeons, performance has increased by 40% or more while power consumption has dropped. The 6-core Xeon is the clear winner and offers a very nice upgrade path for owners of current Xeon 73xx servers. We even dare to predict that the newest Nehalem based Xeons will not really enter this market before the octal-core Beckton is launched in the second half of 2009.
When it comes to the virtualization market, which is a much larger market (in shipments), it is a very different picture. Where the 6-core CPU extends an existing lead elsewhere, for virtualization the new 45nm Xeon MP comes just in time. The quad-core Opteron has been giving the Xeon 73xx a serious beating, offering up to 24% better performance while using 20-25% less power (X7350 versus 8356). If you prefer to look at CPUs with approximates the same TDP, Opteron was offering about a third more performance while consuming a few Watts less. The hot and power hungry FB-DIMMs do not help in a market where performance/Watt and more memory (higher consolidation ratios) rule, and the Opteron clearly has better virtualization support.
The new 45nm Xeon X7460 brings the virtualized performance/Watt crown back to the Intel camp, and we expect the E7450 (2.4GHz) to offer an even better performance/Watt ratio. After all, the E7450 also has six cores but at a lower TDP. In the very near term, AMD will probably have no other choice than to lower the price of its fastest quad-cores. Nevertheless, the battle for the virtualization market is still not over, as both AMD and Intel have new quad-cores lined up.
Quite a few people gave us assistance with this project, and as always we would like to thank them. Our thanks goes to Sanjay Sharma, Trevor Lawless, Kristof Sehmke, Matty Bakkeren, Damon Muzny, Brent Kerby, Michael Kalodrich and Angela Rosario. A very special thanks to Kaushik Banerjee who pointed out errors in our virtualization benchmarking procedure and Tijl Deneut, who helped me solve the weirdest problems despite the numerous setbacks we encountered in this project.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
34 Comments
View All Comments
JarredWalton - Wednesday, September 24, 2008 - link
I'm sure Johan will rerun tests when Shanghai actually launches. He's been working on creating the virtualization testing scenarios for a while, and with something finally in place testing of future products will not be a problem. The launch of Dunnington just happened to coincide with the time for doing this virtualization article.helldrell666 - Wednesday, September 24, 2008 - link
It seems that inquirer's Charlie demirjian was right after all,Anandtch is a pro INTEL anti AMD sight.It's obvious that their reviews are biased and unfair against AMD.Anandtech exists to troll for INTEL...That's it.
Loknar - Wednesday, September 24, 2008 - link
Years ago the Inquirer accused Anandtech of being pro-AMD. Check out the old Athlon XP articles. I won't let you accuse Anandtech of being biased! This is one of the only smart website in the world, please look in your own backyard before accusing the only ones doing true reporting.Anyway.. what is this about AMD vs Intel? We are enthusiastically watching the competitors fighting each other in the most healthy way. Did you buy AMD stocks or - why do you seem to have personal interest in this matter?
Chill out and enjoy the nice products this competition brings is what I'm saying.
whatthehey - Wednesday, September 24, 2008 - link
Anyone who ever - EVER - refers to someone form the Inquirer as being "right" is so obviously stupid that you don't even deserve to read articles like this. All you'll do is hurt your tiny little brain trying to fit truth into your world-view where AMD rules, Intel sucks, and Charlie isn't an idiot.FWIW, I read this article and didn't feel it was at all Intel biased. We all know that AMD can't compete worth a damn on the desktop, and AnandTech has been one of the few sites that has provided any serious server articles where they have frequently pointed out performance advantages AMD still maintains. Even this article is quite positive for AMD, showing that many IT admins with Opteron servers should be fine for a while yet. If you're buying a new server, Dunnington appears to (finally) take the performance crown for 4S/8S and virtualization servers. I also understand how complex coming up with anything resembling a repeatable virtualization benchmark, so it's nice to see some independent testing that doesn't end up praising blade farms. Not that there's anything wrong with blades... other than the proprietary nature and extremely high costs.
socrilles07 - Wednesday, September 24, 2008 - link
I don't get it - instead of using the already released high end AMD processor they used the much lower price point processor for a quite unfair comparison. In the end they make assumptions about what the performance to watt will be in the higher end processor. I thought anandtech was suppose to be THE review site, can you not afford the faster processor? or has AMD stopped providing you samples because of you bias? Lets do Apples to Apples comparisonsJohanAnandtech - Wednesday, September 24, 2008 - link
Add 8% to our 8356 benchmarks and you'll know where the AMD Opteron 8360SE ends up in the best case. It is not that hard.From price/performance/Watt point of view, the 8356 is the best offer AMD has right now, and I am sure AMD would sent us another CPU if they felt otherwise.
We can not buy CPUs at $2000 a piece for each review that we write. If you work with virtualization and other server software, you have an idea how many manhours go in this kind of article. Add $8000 of AMD CPUs, $8000 of Intel CPUs... I hope you understand I don't feel like spending the rest of my time on ebay desperately trying to recoup some of my massive losses of buying server CPUs.
socrilles07 - Wednesday, September 24, 2008 - link
you can't buy processors that cost $2000 a piece but some how you manage to get samples of processors costing twice that before they are released......so obviously you are no longer getting samples from AMD for some reason if not you could've done a comparison with at least the high end processor if not the next gen AMD processor which wouldve been more like the anandtech of the past.JohanAnandtech - Wednesday, September 24, 2008 - link
"so obviously you are no longer getting samples from AMD for some reason"We'll see. :-)
helldrell666 - Tuesday, September 23, 2008 - link
What a good INTEL supporting article.But, It is expected from anandetch.Their ATOM review that made ATOM look like the best offering in it's category and their phenom reviews that made the phenom look like a two dual cores on a chip with one disabled.....These days one must take every little thing with a lot of salt.Bulldoze.....!!!!
Anantech reviews of AMD's products are stuffed with false and biased perspectives and numbers.
npp - Tuesday, September 23, 2008 - link
Look, we're trying to get some discussion here. If you don't like anandtech and you're convinced that it is biased towards Intel, why do you keep reading it? And if you've expected that a six-core Intel CPU would be slower than an AMD quad-core, you were obvoiusly mistaken, so take a note and give some constructive criticism, if you can.